Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ancestral vs. Matches

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ancestral vs. Matches

    I've got a couple of 37 exact matches, one with a surname that is likely mine (I was adopted) and one with connections to the first surname and from the same area.

    That surname indicates strong welsh/scots background but I don't show much from that in the ancestral origins charts in mta high res--0.5% in Wales, .5 UK and .4 Scotland, whereas I'm at 1.5% for Danish.


    The highest percentage I show in the y chart is Wales but a non-significant .2 at 12 markers, .3% at 25 and .1 at 37. Everything else is .1 or less. I'm in haplogroup R1B1A2.

    So, what is my european ancestry? Or better put, what does it all mean??

    thanks.

  • #2
    I don't see a R1b1a2

    Is that predicted or from a deep clade test?

    If you didn't take a deep clade test (I'm not an expert like a few others here on the post are when it comes to haplogroups but...) I'd recommend that instead of looking at the ancestral origins page. just my 2 cents worth.

    Comment


    • #3
      Ok nevermind my question. I found r1b1a2 here but its not on FTDNA that I can see...

      http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html

      Comment


      • #4
        I didn't do deep clade? I went to the Isogg site but don't know what any of that means.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Freep View Post
          I've got a couple of 37 exact matches, one with a surname that is likely mine (I was adopted) and one with connections to the first surname and from the same area.

          That surname indicates strong welsh/scots background but I don't show much from that in the ancestral origins charts in mta high res--0.5% in Wales, .5 UK and .4 Scotland, whereas I'm at 1.5% for Danish.


          The highest percentage I show in the y chart is Wales but a non-significant .2 at 12 markers, .3% at 25 and .1 at 37. Everything else is .1 or less. I'm in haplogroup R1B1A2.

          So, what is my european ancestry? Or better put, what does it all mean??

          thanks.
          Since you have two exact matches at 37 markers, that's much more accurate than trying to judge ancestry from your mtDNA matches. I think that's what you're referring to in what I've bolded above.

          With a 37/37 match, you're dealing with a common ancestor probably within the last 200 years. I would say your paternal line ancestry is whatever the ancestry of your two matches is. If they have documented their paternal lines to some specific location in Europe, then that's where your paternal line ancestry is from.

          In the case of a high-resolution mtDNA match, the common ancestor may have easily lived 1,000 or more years ago. So it doesn't tell you with any degree of probability from which country or ethnic group your maternal line comes in the last few hundred years. While it may be called a high-resolution match as far as mtDNA goes, it's nowhere near the resolution of your 37/37 yDNA match.

          And besides, you're dealing with two different lines here - yDNA is reflecting your paternal line ancestry and mtDNA is reflecting your maternal line ancestry. Given that you're adopted, are you sure that your paternal line and maternal line ancestry are from the same geographic area or ethnic group?

          You should consider ordering FTDNA's new autosomal test, Family Finder. This tests your 22 pairs of autosomal chromosomes and will possibly connect you with 5th cousins or closer from all the lines in your ancestry, not just the paternal or maternal line. It sounds like this is what you're hoping to get from DNA testing.

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks, MK

            I might do the Family Finder after the next convenience store robbery--I'm waiting on the 67 y-dna just now. Does sound as if the FF will do what I want. It's incredibly frustrating to try an trace an ancestry from 1600 to present as everything online is set up to go the other way. . .

            thanks
            JPW

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Freep View Post
              Thanks, MK
              It's incredibly frustrating to try an trace an ancestry from 1600 to present as everything online is set up to go the other way. . .
              Yes, and that's because going backwards from yourself is the only way to do it with any chance of accuracy.

              Granted there are significant difficulties facing adoptees, but trying to trace forward from 1600 and bridge a gap of some 300 years is like looking up from the base of a very large tree and wondering which path to take to find a particular as-yet-unidentifiable leaf.

              In the normal case it is much easier to start at that leaf (i.e. you) and try to work your way down to the base.

              Comment

              Working...
              X